10,478 research outputs found
Constant Rank Bimatrix Games are PPAD-hard
The rank of a bimatrix game (A,B) is defined as rank(A+B). Computing a Nash
equilibrium (NE) of a rank-, i.e., zero-sum game is equivalent to linear
programming (von Neumann'28, Dantzig'51). In 2005, Kannan and Theobald gave an
FPTAS for constant rank games, and asked if there exists a polynomial time
algorithm to compute an exact NE. Adsul et al. (2011) answered this question
affirmatively for rank- games, leaving rank-2 and beyond unresolved.
In this paper we show that NE computation in games with rank , is
PPAD-hard, settling a decade long open problem. Interestingly, this is the
first instance that a problem with an FPTAS turns out to be PPAD-hard. Our
reduction bypasses graphical games and game gadgets, and provides a simpler
proof of PPAD-hardness for NE computation in bimatrix games. In addition, we
get:
* An equivalence between 2D-Linear-FIXP and PPAD, improving a result by
Etessami and Yannakakis (2007) on equivalence between Linear-FIXP and PPAD.
* NE computation in a bimatrix game with convex set of Nash equilibria is as
hard as solving a simple stochastic game.
* Computing a symmetric NE of a symmetric bimatrix game with rank is
PPAD-hard.
* Computing a (1/poly(n))-approximate fixed-point of a (Linear-FIXP)
piecewise-linear function is PPAD-hard.
The status of rank- games remains unresolved
On the Cryptographic Hardness of Local Search
We show new hardness results for the class of Polynomial Local Search problems (PLS):
- Hardness of PLS based on a falsifiable assumption on bilinear groups introduced by Kalai, Paneth, and Yang (STOC 2019), and the Exponential Time Hypothesis for randomized algorithms. Previous standard model constructions relied on non-falsifiable and non-standard assumptions.
- Hardness of PLS relative to random oracles. The construction is essentially different than previous constructions, and in particular is unconditionally secure. The construction also demonstrates the hardness of parallelizing local search.
The core observation behind the results is that the unique proofs property of incrementally-verifiable computations previously used to demonstrate hardness in PLS can be traded with a simple incremental completeness property
SAT-Based Synthesis Methods for Safety Specs
Automatic synthesis of hardware components from declarative specifications is
an ambitious endeavor in computer aided design. Existing synthesis algorithms
are often implemented with Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs), inheriting their
scalability limitations. Instead of BDDs, we propose several new methods to
synthesize finite-state systems from safety specifications using decision
procedures for the satisfiability of quantified and unquantified Boolean
formulas (SAT-, QBF- and EPR-solvers). The presented approaches are based on
computational learning, templates, or reduction to first-order logic. We also
present an efficient parallelization, and optimizations to utilize reachability
information and incremental solving. Finally, we compare all methods in an
extensive case study. Our new methods outperform BDDs and other existing work
on some classes of benchmarks, and our parallelization achieves a super-linear
speedup. This is an extended version of [5], featuring an additional appendix.Comment: Extended version of a paper at VMCAI'1
Towards Realizability Checking of Contracts using Theories
Virtual integration techniques focus on building architectural models of
systems that can be analyzed early in the design cycle to try to lower cost,
reduce risk, and improve quality of complex embedded systems. Given appropriate
architectural descriptions and compositional reasoning rules, these techniques
can be used to prove important safety properties about the architecture prior
to system construction. Such proofs build from "leaf-level" assume/guarantee
component contracts through architectural layers towards top-level safety
properties. The proofs are built upon the premise that each leaf-level
component contract is realizable; i.e., it is possible to construct a component
such that for any input allowed by the contract assumptions, there is some
output value that the component can produce that satisfies the contract
guarantees. Without engineering support it is all too easy to write leaf-level
components that can't be realized. Realizability checking for propositional
contracts has been well-studied for many years, both for component synthesis
and checking correctness of temporal logic requirements. However, checking
realizability for contracts involving infinite theories is still an open
problem. In this paper, we describe a new approach for checking realizability
of contracts involving theories and demonstrate its usefulness on several
examples.Comment: 15 pages, to appear in NASA Formal Methods (NFM) 201
- …